Allowing surgical castration of piglets

Key points of the debate

The debate concerned allowing the surgical castration of piglets after 2035 and the adequacy of pain relief and anaesthesia. The government parties and the Centre Party from the opposition defended the proposal on the grounds of the competitiveness of domestic pig farming, exports and security of supply. The rest of the opposition strongly opposed overturning the ban for animal welfare reasons and citing expert opinions, so the proposal provoked deep disagreement.

• –Does overturning the castration ban impair animal welfare, or is mandatory anaesthesia sufficient as a solution?
• –Would a national castration ban jeopardise the competitiveness, exports and security of supply of Finnish pork production?
• –Should the transition period be maintained to await the completion of research projects and potential EU-level policies?

• National Coalition PartySplit

  The majority of the group supported the proposal on the grounds of agricultural competitiveness, security of supply and the improvement in animal welfare brought by the requirement for anaesthesia. However, a view was also expressed within the group that surgical castration should be abandoned due to the pain experienced by the animals.

  ”Itse asiassa tämä hallituksen esityshän parantaa eläinten hyvinvointia, koska nyt tulee puudutus pakolliseksi.”

• Finns PartyIn favour

  The group defends the proposal to secure domestic food security, security of supply and the economic viability of pig farming. A unilateral ban is considered to shift production abroad to countries where animal welfare standards are lower.

  ”Esityksessä ehdotetaan kastraatiokiellon kumoamista. Tämä estää merkittävät kustannukset ja tuotannon esteet, jotka voisivat vaarantaa alan elinkelpoisuuden.”

• Swedish People's PartyIn favour

  The group supports the proposal so that the competitiveness of Finnish producers in the single market is not compromised by stricter regulation than in the rest of the EU. Overly stringent national regulation would lead to the shutdown of production and an increase in imports.

  ”Jos sääntely menee liian tiukaksi, vaarannamme kansainvälisen kilpailukykymme.”

• Christian DemocratsIn favour

  The group supports the proposal because a national castration ban would place Finland alone at a disadvantage compared to other countries. At the same time, animal welfare will be improved by making the use of local anaesthesia mandatory.

  ”Lainmuutoksella kumottaisiin porsaiden kirurgisen kastraation kielto, joka olisi tullut voimaan vuonna 2035.”

• Social DemocratsAgainst

  The group opposes repealing the castration ban and considers it a serious setback for animal welfare. Amending the act is considered hasty, as plenty of time would still have remained in the long transition period and research into alternatives is ongoing.

  ”Eläinten hyvinvointilain tarkoitus on suojella eläimiä kärsimykseltä, ja siksi kastraatiokieltoa ei tule perua.”

• Centre PartyIn favour

  The group supports the proposal, as a unilateral castration ban would weaken the profitability, exports and food security of domestic pig production. Introducing anaesthesia and pain relief to farms is seen as a responsible and sufficient solution.

  ”Yksipuolinen kastraatiokielto Suomessa voisi merkittävästi heikentää kotimaisen sianlihan tuotannon kannattavuutta.”

• GreensAgainst

  The group calls for the rejection of the proposal because surgical castration causes unnecessary suffering to piglets, which even anaesthesia does not completely eliminate. Economic interests or exports should not take precedence over animal welfare and expert knowledge.

  ”Kirurginen kastraatio aiheuttaa pienille porsaille täysin tarpeetonta kärsimystä. Sen ei pitäisi olla sivistysvaltiossa laillista. Esitän, että tämä lakiesitys hylätään.”

• Left AllianceAgainst

  The group strongly opposes the proposal and considers that overturning the castration ban prolongs the suffering and pain of millions of animals. The decision is seen as the result of meat industry lobbying contrary to the will of experts and consumers.

  ”Kastraatiokiellon peruminen tarkoittaa sitä, että miljoonien älykkäiden ja tuntevien eläinten kipu ja kärsimys tulee nyt jatkumaan.”

This digest was generated by AI from 72 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record. The longest speeches were shortened in the digest's source material.